So what? More than one person has claimed the shooting was justified based on the available information. They're wrong about that too. Consensus is not evidence.

If you were more DISCIPLINED, you could repress your latent homosexuality in the form of PUSH UPS! That's the pistolpete-way!

Your premise is based on the perp being "criminally insane," so you have no point.

You are projecting. My only claim is that there is not enough information available to conclude that the shooting was justified.

You are biased, and siding with the argument that the shooting was justified. I need more evidence. That's not obtuse. It's rational.

You're not trying to understand.

REDSKINSGREAT-GATE: Redskins Grated by Redskins Great; Debate use of "@redskin great"

"Clinically insane" is not a thing that exists. But throw "clinical" in front of words so that it looks like you know what you're talking about to the uninformed. That's solid rhetoric.

This is the best take on the situation I've read here. Thanks.

It could be the right call. We don't have all the facts.

You're like a psychic or something!

I don't think you understand what constitutes "rational" and "logical." QUICK! SOMEBODY SHOOT HIM!

I'm not proposing shoot to maim. I'm not sure what triggered (HA!) your response.

If she shot at the cops, then Stem didn't do anything wrong. If Stem shot three times without adequate provocation, he should go to jail.

I agree with everything you've said. It highlights how easy it is to draw different conclusions based on the circumstances. I would like more facts before I draw a conclusion. The pro-shooting commenters appear to have all the information they need. I find that problematic.

No facts. Only conjecture and rationalization. Thanks for the input!

I'm glad I'm not you.

Disarm does not equate to shoot dead. You're presuming she was going to kill innocent people when there is no evidence to support this conclusion. I have never heard of an investigation into an officer NOT discharging his firearm.

Did she point it at the officer? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere. Genuinely interested in whether that's true, or just something you're presupposing.

Enabler.